Richard Harfoush – Call of the homeland
It is no longer in the cabinet session what is normal. After a meeting that lasted more than four hours, the Minister of Information Paul Morcos went out to announce what the American envoy Tom Barak described as “the historical and bold decision.”
In Baabda Palace, in the presence of the President of the Republic, General Joseph Aoun and Prime Minister Nawaf Salam, and amid the withdrawal of the ministers of the Shiite duo and Minister Fadi Makki, the Lebanese Cabinet agreed to end the armed presence on the entire Lebanese territories, including the weapon of Hezbollah, and the deployment of the Lebanese army in the border areas with Syria and Israel, that is, on the goals of the Barak Park.
Marcus, who read the decisions outside the hall after the final touches were put on the final reading, indicated that the government also agreed to start indirect negotiations to demarcate the borders with Israel, as well as the demarcation of the borders with Syria, stressing that the application of all the items of the Barak paper remains conditional on the implementation of each country for the obligations concerned with it.
Repeated sources confirmed that the Prime Minister and with him the Minister of Information and Justice, that is, Morcos and Adel Nassar, sought until the last moments to dissuade the ministers who withdrawn from their decision to leave. Advanced formulas were offered, guarantees were presented, but something that did not succeed. The Shiite ministers came out of the hall, but they did not leave the government, which was confirmed by the Minister of Information when he pointed out that “their withdrawal does not raise the issue of the charter, especially since they are still committed to the ministerial statement.” He continued: “The session began with the presence of ministers from all spectra, and the charter is discussed when forming governments only, not in the details of each government session.”
A constitutional source stressed in an interview with “Call of the homeland” that the recent government session does not miss the absurdity at all, because the latter is linked to the balance between the Christian and Muslim components in the process of forming governments, not with the full representation of each sect in each government session.
The source said: “It is constant and sure that the charter is based on a balance between Christians and Muslims, based on the 1943 Charter, and does not extend in any way to the doctrines within the same sect, therefore, it is not possible to invoke the loss of the charter in the absence of a doctrine of any sect, because this logic inevitably leads to paralyzing political life and disrupting the work of institutions.”
He added: “It is not permissible to use the concept of the charter, as an excuse to disrupt government action, or as a tool to monopolize or confiscate the decision of a sect, as it sometimes happens with the Shiite community, where the absence is portrayed as stabbing the Charter, which is unconstitutionally or nationally.”
The source stressed that it is not the right to those who have volunteered to withdraw from the session or resign from the government, to later invoke the loss of the charter. Whoever deviates himself from the national consensus, he cannot confiscate the majority of the majority or imposes paralysis on political life, because this contradicts the most basic principles of democracy. The principle of the charter does not explain selectively and is not used to disrupt the state.
Perhaps what was most remarkable at the end of the session is the high applause from the remaining ministers in the hall, who expressed their full support for what was approved. Only Minister Makki withdrew alongside the two ministers of the duo, while the rest were applauded warmly after the discotheque of the statement ended before the ministers before reciting it from the pulpit of the media hall, that is, outside the meeting hall in Baabda Palace, according to ministerial sources, “Call of the homeland”.
This applause, and if it seemed traditional, constituted a rare moment of the inclusive national consensus, in which it seemed that the Lebanese state decided, even once, to take a step that is not back in the direction of actual sovereignty.
Barak, who will not be late in visiting Lebanon on a new diplomatic mission early next week, was the first commentator on the government session, and he tweeted: “We congratulate the President of the Republic, General Joseph Aoun, Prime Minister Nawaf Salam, and the Council of Ministers, on the historical, bold and prestigious decision this week, to start implementing the agreement to stop hostilities signed in November 2024, Security Council Resolution 1701, and agreement Taif.
And Barak added: “The decisions of the cabinet this week have finally put into effect a solution for Lebanon. We are standing next to the Lebanese people.”
Away from the local and regional connotations that will be based on this decision, the security background that the country has been witnessing for weeks cannot be ignored. Since the moment of the beginning of the payment in the direction of implementing Resolution 1701, a number of sovereign figures, whose name has been associated with the rice revolution or demanding the disarmament of Hezbollah, was subjected to clear intimidation waves. The scenes do not stop the return of the specter of political assassinations.
The assassinations, in the modern history of Lebanon, were always a tool to stop the sovereign “Momntom”, from the attempt to assassinate Marwan Hamada to the assassination of Rafik Hariri, Samir Kassir, Gibran Tueni, Pierre Gemayel, Wissam Eid, Medal of Al -Hassan, and other bloody stations.
Only a single bullet was sufficient to return the scorpions back, towards a guardianship that does not die. Is this bloody paper, already, is what remains before the non -state system was exalted to its compassionate death?
The post Are the assassinations returning? appeared first on 961 tobay Lebanon today.
